Fear, a learning inhibitor

Learning is about creating new neural connections, which requires resisting reflexive thinking, activated in situations of danger or stress. To learn, a trusting environment is essential—one free from fear or punishment, where the brain can free itself from protective mechanisms. In the classroom, as in parenting, threats hinder learning. Punishing a disruptive student activates their reflexive thinking but does not enable them to learn. The solution lies in transformation: creating a space for dialogue and collaboration, where each student feels safe to explore and build. Trust is the key to learning.

Cognitive Resistance

At a physiological level, learning involves creating new neural connections. To achieve this, conditions must allow for the formation of these connections. While the brain is extensively studied, much remains unknown, and what we think we understand is often challenged by future research. We now know that preactivated groups of neurons, known as reflexive thinking, exist, and that creating new neural connections requires resisting these preactivated neurons. This is called cognitive resistance. To learn, one must resist oneself. Jean-Pierre Changeux, Stanislas Dehaene, Olivier Houdé, among others, have studied the process of cognitive resistance.

Reflexive thinking is used by humans to respond to urgent situations. When quick decisions are needed, such as in the face of a threat, we mobilize our preactivated neurons—our reflexive thinking—to produce immediate responses to external stimuli. This danger can be physical, social, emotional, etc. For example, in a classroom, if students fear punishment, their brains are in reflexive mode. If we are in a state of fear or anxiety, we simply cannot learn, as the brain is not in the conditions that allow cognitive resistance and, therefore, the creation of new neural connections.

Conditions for Learning

The conditions that allow our brain to “take the time” to resist reflexive thinking are those of a trusting environment, where no danger is perceived. The primary role of the educator, if their goal is truly for students to learn, is to create these favorable conditions. These conditions include the absence of fear, trust within the group, and the emotional certainty that in the classroom space, no danger is present. This is the initial condition without which no learning is physiologically possible.

It is particularly challenging to establish these conditions in a hierarchical education system. This is even more complex in middle or high school, for example, where students spend only an hour with a teacher. How, within an hour, can a circle of trust be built among those present, explore learning together, and then exit that space of trust?

Threats and Punishment Block Learning

In parenting, the same challenge exists. A child subjected to threats, punishment, humiliation, or even physical violence (which has been illegal in France since November 2019, France being the last country in Europe to legislate against Ordinary Educational Violence) cannot learn. If the educational relationship between parents and child is based on threats or punishment, the child cannot learn from their mistakes. It is often believed that punishment leads to learning, but the opposite is true. The more punishment there is, the less learning occurs. The child develops psychological defense mechanisms, constantly operating in reflexive mode, but never creating new neural connections. They learn nothing but become accustomed to functioning in a protective, reflexive mode.

Example in a Classroom

This may seem unsettling, as one might think that if someone does something wrong (according to one’s own moral judgment), punishment should deter them from repeating it. For example, if a student makes noise in class, disturbing others, the teacher might punish them by giving them a zero, writing a note in their notebook, or depriving them of something. One might expect that, having faced the consequences of their punishment, the student would learn not to repeat the behavior. But in reality, they only protect themselves against the aggression of the punishment, activating protective reflexes without engaging their learning system. They learn nothing.

So, what to do? Putting oneself in the teacher’s position, how should a situation where a student disrupts the class be handled? While it disturbs other students, severe punishment creates a threat for everyone, inhibiting the entire group’s ability to learn! Violence directed at one student frightens the whole class, and no one can focus on the lesson. The solution lies in transformation. The word “work” comes not only from “tripalium,” an instrument of torture, but also from “travel,” meaning journey and transformation. Learning is about being transformed: acquiring new knowledge, reasoning skills, gestures, and reflexes. The group must work together, staying on topic but building something lasting.

For example, when a student disrupts a math class, rather than punishing them, one could seek to understand the reasons behind their behavior. This does not mean justifying it but bringing them back to themselves, avoiding the perception of their actions as an attack on the teacher or the institution. This may unsettle the class, as other students might express frustration, questioning why attention is given to the disruptor rather than to those following the rules. In this case, pedagogical creativity is needed. For instance, the class could be divided into three groups: one continuing to work autonomously on exercises, another reflecting on respectful ways to learn together, and a third discussing with the disruptive student to understand their behavior and help them express themselves differently.

The goal is to avoid fear and build a space of trust. By transforming a destabilizing moment into an opportunity for dialogue and collective construction, learning is fostered. Students feel safe, and their brains can create new neural connections. Instead of a repressive system, the teacher proposes a collaborative approach, sowing seeds of trust. Students will learn because they no longer feel threatened or in need of protection.

Depending on the students’ levels, those more advanced can work autonomously, while others explore more philosophical or logical topics related to mathematics. The goal is no longer to strictly follow the curriculum but to enable each student to acquire mathematical foundations useful for their life and thinking. The curriculum is a tool, but if students do not learn, it is a pedagogical failure. Our role is to guide students in learning, not merely to expose them to the information in the curriculum.

Albert Jacquard

Finally, it is essential not to stigmatize struggling students. If a student is judged or stigmatized, they are placed in a state of fear, which inhibits their ability to learn. Geneticist Albert Jacquard recounted a pedagogical experiment where students who had previously struggled academically, considered excellent in a new school, became high achievers. The confidence placed in them enabled their learning, whereas in their previous situation, they were biologically incapable of doing so. A trusting environment is therefore what makes learning possible.